EVE General Discussion

Maybe in the Forge region, but I'm pretty sure Forge has ice belts, so vOv

"Guys, people who get shot in a PVP game are victims and if you don't see it that way, you have low self esteem"

If implemented, I will immediately purchase a freighter of some sort, fit it out with as many 1600mm plates as possible, stuff the cargo full of as many 1600mm plates as possible, slap a microwarp on it, and tear ass all over jita instablapping people in my death freighter, and zero fucks will be given by me. I'll then lobby to implement a windshield wiper module so i can clean all the frigate hulls off my ride while i'm cruisin.

EVE is a game where all players compete against one another in a player-driven economy, whether it's over resources or territory. That is a form of PvP and effects all other players, PvPers and PvErs. If you wish to be exempt from being shot, it follows that you should be exempt from all forms of PvP to prevent people using alts to abuse such a system. In that spirit, I suggest all ore and commodities acquired by non-PvPers can only be used to make items that cannot be used in-game (except for non-PvPer exclusive weapons and ammo) and that they do not generate ISK for ratting but instead some other, completely seperate currency that can't be used to purchase any items useable in game. Anything else and they are PvPing, whether they realize it or not.

There are hundreds of mining bots in caldari space and at least as many mission bots. Market bots are an issue but not the biggest number. They simply spam the most

The game does allow and attempts to promote meaningful conflict, but at the same time give plenty of allowance for conflict of an entirely less meaningful variety. And rightly so, but as such, considering that many of the acts being questioned aren't being done because of their strategic value but because they can be of simply for enjoyment, the statement of the fact that there is meaningful PvP doesn't form an adequate defense for creating a free for all system.

I shall state this as clearly as possible since you seem to be avoiding the point.


I would direct you to the Supreme Court ruling in Wickard v. Filburn http://www.lawnix.com/cases/wickard-filburn.html which clearly establishes that all intrapersonal market activity and production has aggregate effects indistinguishable from interpersonal market transactions.

THEREFORE, Due to Point 1, even passive market or industrial activities is a form of competition. As eloquently pointed out by previous posters.

IT IS ARGUED, because of this interconnected nature to allow certain play styles excessive protection from the forces of competition creates destabilizing natural monopolies of supply that have a deleterious effect upon the economy.

THUS, the safe aggregation of resources, production and transmission of finished goods without fear of loss is a threat of such significance to the EVE economy that we must oppose any de jure or de facto attempts to establish it.

QED,
Reset Test.

Note: Addressing your side argument, the PvP of Griefing is very meaningful in two distinct ways. Foremost it is enjoyable. By creating a break from the mundane it encourages subscriptions. Secondly, it creates scarcity and volatility of the market which is necessary to maintain the interest and challenge of market and industrial PvP. It is an integral part of a holistic biosphere of competition. To ignore it's influence would be as if you were dismissing the contribution of the humble Apis mellifera to agriculture. A mistake to be made with very grave consequences.

Because CCP created high sec to give them a way to play this game the way to play this game in a non-PVP centric way... altering EVE from a PVP-centric game into more of a sandbox where you can play it PVP-centric or not, depending on what EVE is about to you.



Because it doesn't go counter to what they want. It is quite easy to play EVE with little to no "exchange of ordinance in space" type PVP.






But we do not need to change EVE to make it carebear friendly. CCP did that long ago, and are much the richer for it as it drastically increased the player base. It is the people that want to change it back that are asking for the changes. It is the carebears that like things the way they are that are resisting most changes.


As for the change to flying with a joystick? Okay, but then CCP would have to set a max "on grid" ship count to about a dozen. Otherwise, the servers would lag out trying to track the massive "ship course adjustment" message flow.

Buy up a bunch of ice products, then use stabbers to bump ice miners out of ice belts... watch the price of ice products skyrocket. PROFIT.


Seems a legitimate game tactic to me.

The defense to this?

None needed.

Sure, you mine less ice, but the ice you do manage to mine is more valuable. Oh no... You have to warp away, and warp back. Maybe pull some cargo expanders and make your ship a little faster and orbit the ice to dodge the bumps. Get a friend withan even faster bump ship and bump the bumper to make him miss the ice miner.

Ice gets expensive enough, the ice belts will be so full of ice miners that the bumpers won't be able to keep them all bumped off the ice.

Self correcting nature of supply and demand effects on price.

Not dissagreeing with this but the sustainability of your non-greifer population is also a consideration. As such it becomes necessary that greifing be in some form mechanically moderated using various levels of difficulty and consequence. IE: Not a free for all, which was the point of my statement. To be clear I'm not arguing for a safe highsec.

I'm sure we may not agree on the level of consequence which is at the same time meaningful while not being overly prohibitive, but I believe the pursuit of that balance is indeed necessary. This is both for the carebear and greifing population as a lack of consequence will over time lead to a reduction in carebear population and leave only players who wish to do harm and other who know how to avoid it. To me it seems this would lead to an overall rather stale environment much like the one people lament in low/null now when looking for targets.